Ask Away

[Orochi]

I'm an atheist (*shocked gasps, woman screams*) and as this is a Christian forum I've opened this thread so anyone who wishes to know more about my beliefs or why I hold them can quiz me to their hearts content.

The only rules are;
The may be a point where we have to agree to disagree, should I say this (or have it said to me) all parties must respect it.
Some of my beliefs may be offensive to others. If you ask a question I will be honest. If you are worried that you may be offended by a question don't ask it. Please don't ask for my beliefs and then blame me if they offend you.
Please be polite and respectful (I will also extend you this courtesy). If I feel you aren't being don't expect a reply.

OK people, ask away.

 

[trek4fr]

Orochi, do you there is meaning or purpose to life?

(Yes, serious question)

 

[Orochi]

Orochi, do you there is meaning or purpose to life?

(Yes, serious question)

Erm, that's a good question.

I think as far as an objective meaning goes there isn't much more than the survival of the human race.

I think that each individual gives their life a subjective purpose that is particular to them. Maybe it's scientific advancement or helping the homeless, or even something smaller like raising a family. We all individually give life our own meaning.

 

[trek4fr]

Thanks for the response. (BTW, though I am a Christian, I don't buy into the notion that our purpose is to all stand around God's throne telling him how great he is for all eternity. Any deity that would create sentient beings as a way to prop up his self-esteem seems a bit self-centered to me.)

Okay, survival of the human race. Fair enough. But, other than the biological drive to do so, why? Why survive? Given the way we treat each other, other life forms on this planet, and the planet itself, why should we survive? Do we deserve it? Or should we do it just because we are driven to?

I would agree with you that we all give our own lives meaning. But why do you think we do this i.e. why are we meaning seeking creatures? If there is no objective meaning, then why not just let ourselves become extinct? In other words, if the only meaning to life is what we give it, and if the truth of things is that we simply cease to exist at death, then why really care about future generations or about helping others here and now? Isn't it then, as one writer in the Bible says, "vanity, vanity, all is vanity"?

 

[Orochi]

Thanks for the response. (BTW, though I am a Christian, I don't buy into the notion that our purpose is to all stand around God's throne telling him how great he is for all eternity. Any deity that would create sentient beings as a way to prop up his self-esteem seems a bit self-centered to me.)

Okay, survival of the human race. Fair enough. But, other than the biological drive to do so, why? Why survive? Given the way we treat each other, other life forms on this planet, and the planet itself, why should we survive? Do we deserve it? Or should we do it just because we are driven to?

I would agree with you that we all give our own lives meaning. But why do you think we do this i.e. why are we meaning seeking creatures? If there is no objective meaning, then why not just let ourselves become extinct? In other words, if the only meaning to life is what we give it, and if the truth of things is that we simply cease to exist at death, then why really care about future generations or about helping others here and now? Isn't it then, as one writer in the Bible says, "vanity, vanity, all is vanity"?

As far as survival goes I meant for no reason other than the biological drive.

I get the feeling that we define the word meaning in slightly different ways. When I say meaning I simple mean what we aim to do in life. I get the feeling you mean a bit more than that (sorry if I'm wrong here).

There is no objective reason you should care about the future or helping people. It's just a case of whether you do, if that makes sense. I see these things as also being subjective. I care about the future and helping people because I think it's right. Just because I think it doesn't mean other people should think it, they also need to decide for themselves (I may judge them based on their decisions but, again, the judgement is subjective).

Blimey if you lot have an award for usage of the terms 'objective' and 'subjective' then I think I just won it .

 

[Tinker Grey]

Welcome aboard. Folks in this sub-forum are nice. Be nice to them. (Of course, we get some less than liberal visitors from time to time.)

Again, welcome.

 

[trek4fr]

As far as survival goes I meant for no reason other than the biological drive.

Okay, I find that reasonable enough. But I’m not sure, imo, that fulfilling our biological drive to the detriment of the planet, such as overpopulation, is a good thing. Moral judgment on my part.

I get the feeling that we define the word meaning in slightly different ways. When I say meaning I simple mean what we aim to do in life. I get the feeling you mean a bit more than that (sorry if I'm wrong here).

I guess what I mean by it is not so much what we might call fate as finding life worth living, feeling alive, feeling that you have something to contribute, that people and the world are better for you having been here. Although I wouldn’t argue over the label, I would call it feeling as though you are part of something More, something Bigger than just your own life. Perhaps it is delusion on my part, but I do feel (notice my own subjectivity) that there is something More going on here than just “eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” Certainly there is nothing wrong with eating, drinking, and being merry. And there is no denying that tomorrow we die. I just question is that is ALL that is going on here, just the survival of the fittest, with no real rhyme or reason to anything. Any thoughts on this?

There is no objective reason you should care about the future or helping people. It's just a case of whether you do, if that makes sense. I see these things as also being subjective.

Perhaps. But if it is all subjective, where does that come from? If there is nothing More, then why don’t we all just live our little hedonistic lives and say, pardon my French, to hell with everyone except me?

I care about the future and helping people because I think it's right. Just because I think it doesn't mean other people should think it, they also need to decide for themselves (I may judge them based on their decisions but, again, the judgement is subjective).

Maybe judgment is subjective. But I don’t think it happens in a vaccum. There are usually reasons, some of them good and some of them not so good, for our value judgments.

So allow me to phrase the next question. I feel that there is a More, something Bigger than I am that I am a small part of. I feel this so strongly that I feel a certain responsibility to others whom I also consider to be part of this More. I don’t see my own sense of meaning fulfilled by simply my own survival or pleasure. Been there. Got the T-shirt. I am, oddly enough, most happy when I am somehow beneficial to others. I feel more part of the More when I am least centered on myself. In your opinion, am I deluded? Is all of this simply “in my head”?


Furthermore, do have experience any sense of a More, of something larger than yourself that ties you to others and to the world? If so, what would you call it? Regardless, what do *you* find your meaning in? What makes you feel the most alive?

 

[someonestupid]

The term "liberal" is an all encompassing term that generally tries to digest many different ideas and take them into consideration. I don't believe atheism is totally an unorthodox concept for liberal Christians who probably, more often than not, don't take every aspect of the Bible literally. Why not ask this question in the fundamentalist section?

 

[Izdaari Eristikon]

The term "liberal" is an all encompassing term that generally tries to digest many different ideas and take them into consideration. I don't believe atheism is totally an unorthodox concept for liberal Christians who probably, more often than not, don't take every aspect of the Bible literally. Why not ask this question in the fundamentalist section?

Um, because this is the only forum in the Congregational section where atheists are welcome? And perhaps he's looking for a civil conversation rather than hostile confrontation?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Um, because this is only forum in the Congregational section where atheists are welcome? And perhaps he's looking for a civil conversation rather than hostile confrontation?

^ This.

 

[Orochi]

I guess what I mean by it is not so much what we might call fate as finding life worth living, feeling alive, feeling that you have something to contribute, that people and the world are better for you having been here. Although I wouldn’t argue over the label, I would call it feeling as though you are part of something More, something Bigger than just your own life. Perhaps it is delusion on my part, but I do feel (notice my own subjectivity) that there is something More going on here than just “eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” Certainly there is nothing wrong with eating, drinking, and being merry. And there is no denying that tomorrow we die. I just question is that is ALL that is going on here, just the survival of the fittest, with no real rhyme or reason to anything. Any thoughts on this?

To me there isn't much more than survival of the fittest. It all boils down to subjectivity in the end. What do you do that gives your life meaning.

Perhaps. But if it is all subjective, where does that come from? If there is nothing More, then why don’t we all just live our little hedonistic lives and say, pardon my French, to hell with everyone except me?

I think originally (if you go back far enough and by that I mean before humanity) we did. As we became increasingly social it became beneficial to survival to work more cooperatively. It's all very well telling someone who needs help to sod off but that means when you need help you are less likely to get it. Evolution simply killed off those who were less likely to work cooperatively until only those with strong social instincts were left.

So allow me to phrase the next question. I feel that there is a More, something Bigger than I am that I am a small part of. I feel this so strongly that I feel a certain responsibility to others whom I also consider to be part of this More. I don’t see my own sense of meaning fulfilled by simply my own survival or pleasure. Been there. Got the T-shirt. I am, oddly enough, most happy when I am somehow beneficial to others. I feel more part of the More when I am least centered on myself. In your opinion, am I deluded? Is all of this simply “in my head”?

I'm not sure I would say deluded. Maybe misguided. I think to most people it's more attractive to believe we are part of something bigger and if you want to believe something enough the human brain will find a way. I also think that most people (especially in America) will have been strongly influenced by someone who passionately believes in a higher cause, that makes them more susceptible than someone who has had no such influence.

Furthermore, do have experience any sense of a More, of something larger than yourself that ties you to others and to the world? If so, what would you call it?

I haven't ever had any such feelings that I would call a sense of something larger. I think empathy to the rest of the human race is the closest I have ever come.

Regardless, what do *you* find your meaning in? What makes you feel the most alive?

I struggle to find much in life that I am passionate about. I'm 20 and reaching that part of life where I have to start thinking about a career but I don't really know what I want to do.

I don't think my meaning extends much further than trying to be as a good a person as I can and enjoying myself. I do enjoy working at my local school though.

 

[Orochi]

The term "liberal" is an all encompassing term that generally tries to digest many different ideas and take them into consideration. I don't believe atheism is totally an unorthodox concept for liberal Christians who probably, more often than not, don't take every aspect of the Bible literally. Why not ask this question in the fundamentalist section?

To be honest I've struggled a little bit with the number of various sections here. I am aware this is a Christian forum where I am the minority and rather than posting my views all over the place I would rather stick mostly to one section.

This section seemed to be the best place to set up shop as an atheist.

 

[sniperelite7]

Well no ones buying what your selling.

Kidding.

Which philosophical arguments(if any) for the existence of God have you found most compelling and how did you address them?

Also...is 20 much better than being 19?

 

[Orochi]

Well no ones buying what your selling.

Kidding.

Which philosophical arguments(if any) for the existence of God have you found most compelling and how did you address them?

Also...is 20 much better than being 19?

I'm not familiar with many philosophical arguments for the existence of God. Also me being an atheist means that I've not found any overly compelling.

I have to say though the worst are the teleological argument and the cosmological argument. It must take a special kind of person to formulate an argument that refutes itself. As I said I've never found any argument overly compelling but as far as an argument that I couldn't instants pick to pieces goes, I say the aesthetic argument.

And no, I definitely preferred being 19 .

 

[trek4fr]

Thanks for your honest answers, Orochi.

To me there isn't much more than survival of the fittest.

And that's where, I guess, I have the most trouble with some atheistic mindsets. If it truly does come down to the survival of the fittest, then those who are seen as or determined to be "unfit" are easily segregated or disposed of. We are little more than highly-developed animals that can be given subjective worth. Christianity, at it's best, says that life is sacred and God even loves the "unfit." Of course, this opens up the subject of theodicy, which I'm not going to get into right now. But I'm not convinced that the survival of the fittest really leads to a mature humanity.

I think originally (if you go back far enough and by that I mean before humanity) we did. As we became increasingly social it became beneficial to survival to work more cooperatively. It's all very well telling someone who needs help to sod off but that means when you need help you are less likely to get it. Evolution simply killed off those who were less likely to work cooperatively until only those with strong social instincts were left.

I agree with this analysis, for the most part. But, imo, the goal of humanity should be, not primarily to survive, but to be compassionate. Survival without compassion, maybe such as the dinosaurs had before they were wiped out, is not, imo, a good plan for the future.

I haven't ever had any such feelings that I would call a sense of something larger. I think empathy to the rest of the human race is the closest I have ever come.

That's a good thing to come close to.

I struggle to find much in life that I am passionate about. I'm 20 and reaching that part of life where I have to start thinking about a career but I don't really know what I want to do.

I say this with no derision, but if you don't find much in life to be passionate about, then perhaps this is why you don't sense a meaning higher than or outside of yourself. It's been my experience that we don't usually find passion by looking inward to our own subjectivity, but outward to connections with others that truly make life worth living. Just my 2c.

I don't think my meaning extends much further than trying to be as a good a person as I can and enjoying myself. I do enjoy working at my local school though.

I think that's good, Orochi. So, let me ask, if you did have something you were passionate about, something "worth living for", what sort of things might those be? Do you believe that some things are of more value than others? Or do you feel that all might indeed be in vanity?

 

[Orochi]

I agree with this analysis, for the most part. But, imo, the goal of humanity should be, not primarily to survive, but to be compassionate. Survival without compassion, maybe such as the dinosaurs had before they were wiped out, is not, imo, a good plan for the future.

I think that, although the reason compassion evolved is it's conducive to survival, it is not necessarily why we feel it (I'm struggling to put my thoughts into words so sorry if this means little sense). What I mean is that we don't necessarily feel compassion because it helps us survive. We maybe began feeling it naturally and evolution meant that those who felt it were more likely to survive, that is why it is now so widespread. What I'm saying is that that at anyone sat down and said to themselves 'I'm gonna act for the good of everyone, but only because it helps me'.

I think that's good, Orochi. So, let me ask, if you did have something you were passionate about, something "worth living for", what sort of things might those be? Do you believe that some things are of more value than others? Or do you feel that all might indeed be in vanity?

It's difficult to know. I would like to think that I will find something to be really passionate about, where I can make a difference to the world. Even in a small way.

I suppose that if I did I'd be in a better position to answer your question.

 

[hedrick]

I have to say though the worst are the teleological argument and the cosmological argument.

I used to think the ontological argument was absurd. But I'm starting to warm to it. What is the basic thing on which the universe was founded? I don't know. Some kind of natural law, God, something has to be at the bottom, unless you think it's turtles all the way down.

So where does the first thing come from? I find the most satisfying concept is that there is something that is so basic that if there is going to be anything existing at all, this has to be there. The core of the ontological argument is that God exists because he has to. That is, he exists necessarily. I can't prove it, but it has a kind of esthetic appeal.

Supposed there's something so basic that it has to exist. What would it be like? It can't be something like the natural law of our universe. There are just too many adjustable parameters. But because of the big bang, we know the current laws can't be basic anyway. There's got to be a bigger system. And it's got to be eternal, because if it isn't, it must have come from another system that is.

I don't see how that system can itself be God. God has to exist in some context, so to me the question is whether the basic system has an intelligence.

I argue as follows. If we've managed to evolve intelligent life in a universe that's a few billion years old, a system complex enough to generate big bangs, of infinite age, surely must have developed intelligence if it wasn't there before. However infinity has strange properties. I'm going to give a proof by contradiction that the basic system must have an eternal intelligence.

Let's assume that there isn't an eternal intelligence in the system. That would mean that the intelligence must have started at some finite time T. But the universe existed at time T - N (where N is how long it would take to evolve intelligence). Hence at time T there must be intelligence. We've just falsified the hypothesis. Hence we know that the basic system has an eternal intelligence.

While I can't prove it, I believe an eternal intelligence in a system from which universes are generated is effectively God.

Does this argument work? I don't know. But this is probably the first time you've seen a proof of God based on evolution.

I should note that I don't actually believe it's possible to prove that God exists.

 

[trek4fr]

I think that, although the reason compassion evolved is it's conducive to survival, it is not necessarily why we feel it (I'm struggling to put my thoughts into words so sorry if this means little sense). What I mean is that we don't necessarily feel compassion because it helps us survive.

I agree. Granted, familial compassion helps the family to survive, with parents caring for children. But I suspect that a wider compassion for others is a relatively late development in our evolution. We feel compassion because, as you have wisely said, we empathize with others, we see them, in some sense, as part of ourselves. And this means we do something to help if we can. Survival is not the goal of compassion, but it is a result. In helping others, we help ourselves also.

It's difficult to know. I would like to think that I will find something to be really passionate about, where I can make a difference to the world. Even in a small way.

Me, too.

I'd like to echo what others here have said and welcome you to this forum and encourage you to participate. As you know, I'm not an atheist, but I do browse some atheist forums from time to time and often feel more at home on those than I do here at CF. Why is that? Because I reject the same kind of "God" that many atheists do. I grew up with an image of God as a Sky-Deity who was watching everything I did in order to determine whether I went to heaven or hell. And despite all the promises that Christians made to me that God intervenes and "answers prayer", I didn't find that to be true. I could have labeled it all as BS and walked away (and for a time I did), but I still felt there is something More.

To me, Orochi, God is a subjective experience, not an objective proposal that can be proven or disproven. I don't deny the ontological arguments for God that seem to offer people evidence. But I doubt that most people are argued into believing in God. They are, imo, loved into it.

Humor me for a moment, please, while I put a new twist on this. The apostle Paul wrote to the Galatian church:

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

In describing what we might call "evidence for God" in the life of a person, Paul offers us very subjective experiences: Love. Joy. Peace. Forbearance (patience). Kindness. Goodness. Faithfulness. Gentleness. Self-control.

I believe in these things, Orochi. I have experienced them. And I think you have too. Dare we call these subjective experiences "God"? Some progressive Christians say, yes. God is love. God is Joy. God is Peace. Etc. When we experience these things, as subjective as they are, we experience God.

Well, this is getting long, this thread is meant to be more about asking you questions than preaching at you, which, I hope, you don't take my responses to be. I'm just sharing with you that many people, Christians and non-Christians, look for God through objective means and I think that is like looking for air with a telescope. Mystics, of which Jesus was one, have always said that God is Something or Someone to be experienced, not just believed in. Belief is relatively impotent. There is no passion in belief. But experience is life-changing. You already know that. So follow the best experiences of your heart, my friend. Whether you label that "God" or not is up to you. But, to me, it is like love -- you'll never know that it is true until it happens to you.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

To quote the brilliant Kramer:

Do you have any conceivable reason to get up in the morning?

 

[Tinker Grey]

To quote the brilliant Kramer:

Do you have any conceivable reason to get up in the morning?

Sure. Everyday is an adventure.

(Page link: xkcd: Nihilism)